No, but this entire episode shows how easy it will be for the right politician with the right subject to talk the people out of all their freedoms.

jeanderson

12-17-2012, 19:05

There are 300,000,000 guns in America. You can ban them all you want. They're not going away. Ever.

nmstew

12-17-2012, 19:13

There are 300,000,000 guns in America. You can ban them all you want. They're not going away. Ever.

It's funny the left wants us to believe that it will be too hard to get rid of 14,000,000 illegal immigrants wo we should just give them amnesty. Yet getting rid of 300,000,000 firearms will be a piece of cake.

barbedwiresmile

12-17-2012, 20:05

Guns could easily be banned in America. All the prerequisites, logistically and culturally, are in place. Frankly I'm surprised we've made it this long.

GlockDiver

12-17-2012, 20:42

Of course they couldn't. Home fabrication technology (3D printing) is on the cusp of being ubiquitous. Once that happens anybody will be able to print themselves out a disposable firearm. And the government will no better be able to control that than they will be able to control MP3 songs.

Cavalry Doc

12-17-2012, 20:55

Guns could be banned. That is a reality. Heller was only 5-4, and thanks to the purple mushroom headed knob sucking libs, Barry will likely get two SCOTUS picks.

So, yes, it is easily within reach to ban all guns other than flint lock muzzle loaders from personal possession, even and including, a forced turn in without compensation, and with the threat of death or incarceration. Again, thank you to the Barry Supporters for making that more likely.

Now, the trick is that making them illegal, even completely illegal, will never make them go away. They will be here forever. Pandora's box has been opened. Even if you were somehow to make a LIBTARDS wish come true, and every firearm in the USA disappeared suddenly tomorrow, they would flood in from the borders. The same borders that we cannot stop criminals, drugs, cars, and guns from crossing now.

DUH?

yellowhand

12-17-2012, 21:58

:rofl:
Take one machine shop
Add 20 pounds of steel
bake for two days:faint:
Americans can and did place a man on the moon and still makes moonshine in NC
:rofl:

I'd give it less than one week and "Made in the USA" would take on a whole new meaning for anyone who thinks banning weapons is a "good Idea"

Of course they couldn't. Home fabrication technology (3D printing) is on the cusp of being ubiquitous. Once that happens anybody will be able to print themselves out a disposable firearm. And the government will no better be able to control that than they will be able to control MP3 songs.

This ^^^.

And the really creative stuff has yet to be imagined. Since these things can be made for "nearly free," what about printed guns with built-in self-destruct mechanisms and chemistry? If it looks like you're about to be unavoidably searched by one of Bloomberg's finest, your pistol turns itself into a puddle of melting slag in 30 seconds.

This is but one aspect of the "big picture" in which the future is information, and information favors the individual over the "intrusive 3rd party."

In 10 years, even London will be completely awash with individual handgun ownership.

Back in the "I like Ike" days, information was hard to come by.
Took 30 seconds to pull up the above:

If a British Granny can make Sten's in her old man's work room, how in the world could anyone expect Americans not to produce anything that has a blueprint on the internet free for the download?

Banning weapons would simply open up a new set of problems, much like the last ban took many from the 9mm back to the 45 ACP since HC mags were no longer avalible.

TxGun

12-17-2012, 22:40

I think it's possible guns could be banned at some future point if we aren't vigilant. Very improbable, granted, but not impossible. Congress would have to address the 2nd Amendment somehow and/or the SCOTUS would have to reverse/change/amend it's 2nd Amendment opinion(s). That still doesn't mean guns would go away, obviously...they would certainly still be out there. And the 'bad guys' would always find ways to get them. But in the most extreme state of gun-banning: if you got caught with a gun...any gun...you could be prosecuted to the extent of the law. That might include prison time. You couldn't go hunting. You couldn't go to the range. Both of those sports would be "obsolete". If you used a gun in self-defense you could be prosecuted. If your house burned and evidence of firearms was found, you could be prosecuted. If you were in an automobile accident and a gun was found, you could be prosecuted. You could hide guns in your house, basically handle them and look at them occasionally, then hide them again. If the penalties were stiff enough, that's all you would dare do. Oh, and hope you never had that fire.

The above is admittedly more than just a little extreme, it's "big brother" taken to the nth degree. But I suppose anything is possible. Do I think it will happen? Absolutely not. The right to keep and bear arms is ingrained in the fabric of this country. But I do think, in the wake of the almost unimagineable images coming out of Newtown, that there is a real danger that certain guns...ARs...AKs...and any other gun the far left/antis can successfully misrepresent as an 'assault weapon' may be banned. And magazines over a certain capacity may be banned. And, it wouldn't be inconceivable that these items aren't grandfathered. Turn them in or you are in violation and you take your chances with the above scenarios. Again, not likely, but it could happen.

BobbyS

12-17-2012, 23:40

I think it's possible guns could be banned at some future point if we aren't vigilant. Very improbable, granted, but not impossible. Congress would have to address the 2nd Amendment somehow and/or the SCOTUS would have to reverse/change/amend it's 2nd Amendment opinion(s). That still doesn't mean guns would go away, obviously...they would certainly still be out there. And the 'bad guys' would always find ways to get them. But in the most extreme state of gun-banning: if you got caught with a gun...any gun...you could be prosecuted to the extent of the law. That might include prison time. You couldn't go hunting. You couldn't go to the range. Both of those sports would be "obsolete". If you used a gun in self-defense you could be prosecuted. If your house burned and evidence of firearms was found, you could be prosecuted. If you were in an automobile accident and a gun was found, you could be prosecuted. You could hide guns in your house, basically handle them and look at them occasionally, then hide them again. If the penalties were stiff enough, that's all you would dare do. Oh, and hope you never had that fire.

The above is admittedly more than just a little extreme, it's "big brother" taken to the nth degree. But I suppose anything is possible. Do I think it will happen? Absolutely not. The right to keep and bear arms is ingrained in the fabric of this country. But I do think, in the wake of the almost unimagineable images coming out of Newtown, that there is a real danger that certain guns...ARs...AKs...and any other gun the far left/antis can successfully misrepresent as an 'assault weapon' may be banned. And magazines over a certain capacity may be banned. And, it wouldn't be inconceivable that these items aren't grandfathered. Turn them in or you are in violation and you take your chances with the above scenarios. Again, not likely, but it could happen.

Well........wouldn't it be difficult to put a large number of people in prison for having a firearm? They have no room right now for the real criminals.

Berto

12-17-2012, 23:50

They could ban alcohol again, too, but the effect will be worse than the problem.

ModGlock17

12-17-2012, 23:54

Explain to me how a gun ban could have prevented this CT tragedy.

And I'll tell you how Cocaine ban have made the Colombians so rich.

wingryder

12-18-2012, 00:32

It would be very scary to try to conceal your firearms after the initial hand-over and grace period. You would then be a criminal for possessing a firearm.

Much as the Nazi's did, the Government would make it an act of patriotism and national pride to snitch on your neighbors who have guns. The could comb through all files and locate many recently purchases firearms... scan the internet in forums such as this one and find out what you've been talking about when you have a false sense of anonymity.

It could happen, but it would take a drastic measures and man power to accomplish it. My only hope is that the population wouldn't stand for it... much like prohibition, where the cure was worse than the disease.

kirgi08

12-18-2012, 01:41

Well........wouldn't it be difficult to put a large number of people in prison for having a firearm? They have no room right now for the real criminals.

There is another option out there.I'd bet it's being bandied about in certain circles.

Explain to me how a gun ban could have prevented this CT tragedy.

And I'll tell you how Cocaine ban have made the Colombians so rich.

It wouldn't have,law abiding folk abide.As ta how that nutjob gained access ta those weapons I won't bandy a guess.'08.

cowboywannabe

12-18-2012, 01:45

they didnt think it would happen in england, they didnt think it would happen in australia, canada still doesnt know what happened.

banning is not the answer, but its easier than addressing the true problem of the mentally ill.

beforeobamabans

12-18-2012, 02:31

Feinstein's new AWB will probe outlawing ownership. Her bill calls for ownership of outlawed items (AWs, high-cap mags and more) to be banned "prospectively" which means current ownership is grandfathered in but if you don't own them prior, you'll never be able to own them. As the owners of banned items die off, the ownership ban becomes ubiquitous. Clever, eh?

cowboywannabe

12-18-2012, 04:43

Feinstein's new AWB will probe outlawing ownership. Her bill calls for ownership of outlawed items (AWs, high-cap mags and more) to be banned "prospectively" which means current ownership is grandfathered in but if you don't own them prior, you'll never be able to own them. As the owners of banned items die off, the ownership ban becomes ubiquitous. Clever, eh?

i hope the bill dies quickly. the real problem is the failure to deal with the mentally ill, but nobody wants to address that because it might hurt somebody's feelings.

MoCop

12-18-2012, 05:35

Guns could easily be banned in America. All the prerequisites, logistically and culturally, are in place. Frankly I'm surprised we've made it this long.

Agree, BWS.

jeanderson

12-18-2012, 05:54

i hope the bill dies quickly. the real problem is the failure to deal with the mentally ill, but nobody wants to address that because it might hurt somebody's feelings.
... or violate their rights. Because of patient confidentiality laws, it is extremely difficult for anyone, including the government, to get a hold of records of one's fitness to own a firearm.

KY Moose

12-18-2012, 06:08

Guns could easily be banned in America. All the prerequisites, logistically and culturally, are in place. Frankly I'm surprised we've made it this long.

Personally, I feel the 2nd Amendment will still be intact. We the people will still have a right to keep and bear arms. But what we are actually allowed to keep in the next 5 years will be drastically different from what you can purchase this week, so will the way you purchase.

Like I mentioned in another thread, my opinion is chances of a 2013 AWB passing is pretty damn good. The chances of the law banning possession of your current "assault weapons" is a possibility too.

I know how many feel about polls, but a poll on a new AWB shows the public in favor by 57%, up 19 points from a decade ago.

Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

rj1939

12-18-2012, 06:31

If they were effectively banned, it would be hailed by the ministry of propoganda as a resounding success, even though people continue to die from gun crimes (and those numbers could likely rise) but it will be a success.

cowboywannabe

12-18-2012, 06:50

over 400 blacks and latinos murdered in Chicago this year alone, but it took the murder of white children to get the "ban" brought up again. Seems the politicos fienstien and obama are a bit racist.

Atlas

12-18-2012, 06:58

It's easy to say "they'll never take my guns!" (and I do feel that way myself) but if the penalty for possession is a mandatory 10 - 15 years in prison many will rethink that position.

pugman

12-18-2012, 07:00

Yes.

I think everyone in this thread needs to take a good long look at what a bill is proposing and what it means.

Will guns ever be completely removed from the U.S - probably not.

Could modern guns be eliminated - absolutely.

People comparing the modern firearm to say wipping up a batch of hooch obviously haven't reviewed the blue prints of even a basic revolver. They sell home brew kits everywhere. During prohibition, people produced liquor in their homes. How many people today could actually produce a safe and reliable firearm? Would you want to fire some plastic firearm produced by Johnny in a 32nd street basement? How many people during prohibition or even today get poisoned or die from improperly made drugs or alcohol? Remember the Liberator FP-45 produced during WW2. A poorly made single shot .45 caliber-is this what people want to resort to?

My father was a machine operator and fabricator for over 40 years. Could he do it with a set of blue prints-yes. Is he producing large numbers of reliable quality firearms-no. Would his firearms even compare to what "your" government will have...hell no.

Lets put it another way...flash back to the 1700-1800's. These were people who built their own homes, in some cases made their own tools, grew their own food, etc. How many pioneers made their own firearms?

If they ban firearms is anyone here going to risk 20 years in prison for possession?

And lest not forget about the "secret" police - your friends and neighbors. My SIL won't let her two teenage children come over to my house because I own firearms. These are properly locked away in a safe, with ammunition stored/hid seperately, and she still doesn't let them come over.

Remember the London news story which ran last year how some guy walking down the street called the police and it caused some massive police response because he found a single .22LR shell laying in the street? People will be trained into this mindset within a year.

I think people would be shocked at how effective the government could be at this if they put their money and power behind it.

Remember the government's motivation now is a school shooting and they are right. Without a modern firearm, the deaths would have been significantly lower. Then again, get rid of cars and you get rid of drunk drivers-but how will the rest of us get to work?

KY Moose

12-18-2012, 07:27

I think people would be shocked at how effective the government could be at this if they put their money and power behind it.

There is the 2006 Amendment to the Insurrection Act that would allow DOD to "assist" in cases of "Other Acts". Not saying that will be used, but its something on the books.

Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

aircarver

12-18-2012, 07:43

over 400 blacks and latinos murdered in Chicago this year alone, but it took the murder of white children to get the "ban" brought up again. Seems the politicos fienstien and obama are a bit racist.

This isn't about taking guns from Chicago hoodlums ... :steamed:

.

Fear Night

12-18-2012, 07:44

It's easy to say "they'll never take my guns!" (and I do feel that way myself) but if the penalty for possession is a mandatory 10 - 15 years in prison many will rethink that position.
They would need to build a LOT more prisons. Also, having 5-10+% of your population behind bars doesn't do much for the health of your economy.

I think a lot of the "from my cold dead hands" scenarios will actually happen, so there will be no prison time. A lot of people would rather be dead than to be a slave. It's just not smart to say so on a public forum.

Good thing I already sold all my assault weapons legally while I still could.

Skyhook

12-18-2012, 07:54

It's easy to say "they'll never take my guns!" (and I do feel that way myself) but if the penalty for possession is a mandatory 10 - 15 years in prison many will rethink that position.

Exactly.

When the armoured vehicles pull up into your neighbor's driveway, the choppers/drones circle overhead, and the guy is taken away for a long time for possession, their diabolical confiscation plan will be almost totally effective.... unless..

Anyhow, banning firearms will not work--- FORBIDDING POSSESSION of firearms, well that's something else they are dwelling upon, I am certain.

pugman

12-18-2012, 07:58

They would need to build a LOT more prisons. Also, having 5-10+% of your population behind bars doesn't do much for the health of your economy.

I'm not saying your wrong...but I could see this.

I've read what 25% of inmates are jail/prison on drug related charges? Pot has been legalized in several states...

You in effect replace one population (drug users/smugglers) with another (now outlawed owners of firearms)

However, I would argue the caliber of person you are putting in jail would differ greatly.

RussP

12-18-2012, 08:19

i hope the bill dies quickly. the real problem is the failure to deal with the mentally ill, but nobody wants to address that because it might hurt somebody's feelings.Amen...

Skyhook

12-18-2012, 08:26

Is anyone else sickened by watching the progressives climb over the mangled bodies to further their political careers?

:puking:

pugman

12-18-2012, 08:34

Is anyone else sickened by watching the progressives climb over the mangled bodies to further their political careers?

:puking:

Never let a tragedy go to waste

Bren

12-18-2012, 08:34

There are 300,000,000 guns in America. You can ban them all you want. They're not going away. Ever.

On top of that, America is full of people who can make them at home. Did you ever watch American Guns and see them make an entire gun from steel stock in theior workshop? Well the world is full of people who have equal or better workshops and gun knowledge and aren't making fancy copies of Colt SAA's - believe it or not, a submachinegun is much easier and cheaper to make. My uncle who worked for ATF from the 60's to the 80's arrested a guy here in Kentucky for building Mac-10 full-autos in his garage. You can't uninvent guns, especially given that they are simple technology that people have made with hand tools for hundreds of years.

If the liberals could wave a magic wand and make every gun in the world disappear, they'd be back next year.

Fear Night

12-18-2012, 08:39

I'm not saying your wrong...but I could see this.

I've read what 25% of inmates are jail/prison on drug related charges? Pot has been legalized in several states...

You in effect replace one population (drug users/smugglers) with another (now outlawed owners of firearms)

However, I would argue the caliber of person you are putting in jail would differ greatly.
No argument there. People that have the money to purchase lots of weapons legally are obviously working, taxpaying, contributing members of society. It would not be smart to incarcerate tens of millions of those individuals and remove them from your revenue base.

Atlas

12-18-2012, 08:51

On top of that, America is full of people who can make them at home. Did you ever watch American Guns and see them make an antire gun from steel stock in theior workshop? Well the world is full of people who have equal or better workshops and gun knowledge and aren't making fancy copies of Colt SAA's - believe it or not, a submachinegun is much easier and cheaper to make. My uncle who worked for ATF from the 60's to the 80's arrested a guy here in Kentucky for building Mac-10 full-autos in his garage. You can't uninvent guns, especially given that they are simple technology that people have made with hand tools for hundreds of years.

If the liberals could wave a magic wand and make every gun in the world disappear, they'd be back next year.

My uncle who worked for ATF from the 60's to the 80's arrested a guy here in Kentucky for building Mac-10 full-autos in his garage.

The difference here is he is just converting a firearm. He wasn't making the magazines, the barrels, the triggers, the ammunition, etc.

If the liberals could wave a magic wand and make every gun in the world disappear, they'd be back next year.

Agree, but in what form? How many parts does a modern Glock 19 have? How about an AR?

I'm not saying it can't be done. However, you won't see 300,000,000 firearms in the U.S. Second, if you actually got your hands on one of these what will it cost? $5K...$10K for a pistol. You won't see people with collections. Every firearm magically disappears tomorrow and someone comes up to me with a preban glock 17 for $10K am I buying it knowing if I actually used it I could see 20 years?

This won't be like drugs where any dealer with a scale, a few baggies and a bag of weed is producing dime bags.

Americans have forgotten their history in the fact this country was started at the business end of a gun.

The one thing politicans have forgotten...ban firearms and history may repeat itself.

whoflungdo

12-18-2012, 09:05

This isn't about taking guns from Chicago hoodlums ... :steamed:

.

Bingo!

Bren

12-18-2012, 10:15

The difference here is he is just converting a firearm. He wasn't making the magazines, the barrels, the triggers, the ammunition, etc.

I said building, not converting. Do you really not understand how simple these are? I have taken apart full auto Mac 10's and even been trained as an armorer on the M3 submachinegun. They are about as complicated as a blowback .380, or a little less, and many of the major parts are nothing but bent and welded sheet metal. Except for time, you could make one without power tools. barrels? No power tools when they started making rifled barrels.

I used to know a deputy jailer who made gun parts at home with a welder and hand tools, just as a hobby. He'd copy the internal parts of your revolver and make you a replacement in no time. Not that difficult at all.

Ammunition is a little harder than making the gun, but only if you want good ammunition and we assume all of the brass and primers have disappeared.

pugman

12-18-2012, 11:25

I said building, not converting. Do you really not understand how simple these are? I have taken apart full auto Mac 10's and even been trained as an armorer on the M3 submachinegun. They are about as complicated as a blowback .380, or a little less, and many of the major parts are nothing but bent and welded sheet metal. Except for time, you could make one without power tools. barrels? No power tools when they started making rifled barrels.

I used to know a deputy jailer who made gun parts at home with a welder and hand tools, just as a hobby. He'd copy the internal parts of your revolver and make you a replacement in no time. Not that difficult at all.

Ammunition is a little harder than making the gun, but only if you want good ammunition and we assume all of the brass and primers have disappeared.

Again, I'm not saying it can't be done. You are right-building a firearm with premade parts is this simple.

What I am saying is this: say the fed passes a true ban and confiscation; and they do confiscate every firearm in the country.

You will have guys making parts. You will have smugglers bring them over the boarder - you will never get rid of all of them.

This said...you get one then what? You aren't taking it to a range. Imagine you keep it in house, a burglar comes in, and you shoot him. Enjoy going to jail.

Imagine someone rats you out or they find out and the fed comes a knockin'...think your revolver is going to stand up to 20 federal officers with ARs or even shotguns.

I'm not going all x-files conspiracy theory bats*** crazy; I'm simply saying while they will never effectively remove every firearm in this country and fully admit there will be black market....who cares. At this point they have won.

I can see the headline now..

In local news a local man, Pugman, shot and killed a burglar as the man entered his home. Police have arrested Pugman for possession of and illegal discharge of a firearm. Mr. Burglar apparently entered the home through a broken window trying to get the means to feed his starving family (read as drugs) and was known as a pillar of the community. Mr. Burglar's family has retained the firm of Dewey, Screwem and Howe to sue Pugman for unnecessary force.

TxGun

12-18-2012, 12:32

The obvious problem is this: sure, you can hide existing guns and/or maybe you can build new ones from parts. But if the penalties are severe enough when you are caught with a banned firearm, then all you'll be able to do with it is bring it out in the dark of night, admire it, then hide it again. You wouldn't risk your personal freedom and/or your family's finances by taking it out to shoot it. And, like someone said, you hope friends and neighbors never rat you out.

Some version of an AWB is coming. I'd bet on that.

janice6

12-18-2012, 12:35

over 400 blacks and latinos murdered in Chicago this year alone, but it took the murder of white children to get the "ban" brought up again. Seems the politicos fienstien and obama are a bit racist.

This is the real news.

Bren

12-18-2012, 12:37

The obvious problem is this: sure, you can hide existing guns and/or maybe you can build new ones from parts. But if the penalties are severe enough when you are caught with a banned firearm, then all you'll be able to do with it is bring it out in the dark of night, admire it, then hide it again. You wouldn't risk your personal freedom and/or your family's finances by taking it out to shoot it. And, like someone said, you hope friends and neighbors never rat you out.

Some version of an AWB is coming. I'd bet on that.

If your plan is to continue to live with a government that imposes that law, you are right. But, if that's your plan, you are already the problem.

tslex

12-18-2012, 12:47

Guns could easily be banned in America. All the prerequisites, logistically and culturally, are in place. Frankly I'm surprised we've made it this long.

This.

They have effectively hijacked the language already: "High-powered military assault weapon" is now the accepted nomenclature for a semi-auto .22.

They have changed the debate: "How many children have to die before you will change your mind and comply." When that is the question, you cannot win the argument.

They are in the process of marginalizing the law: Sheila Jackson Lee on CNN this morning stated that "A discussion of an assault weapon ban had nothing to do with the Second Amendment."

This is going to be very, very bad. But they're not stopping now and they know no shame. To quote SJL form the same interview: "Now at last we have the opportunity to pass the legislation I have been bringing up for 10 years."

certifiedfunds

12-18-2012, 12:47

It's easy to say "they'll never take my guns!" (and I do feel that way myself) but if the penalty for possession is a mandatory 10 - 15 years in prison many will rethink that position.

How many would keep their guns if penalty for possession was similar to possession of a large amount of heroin, and, they were unable to go out and use them without the possibility of being arrested?

Nonetheless, my opinion has always been that they won't ban them but they will most certainly tax them.

It does make me wonder where all these law and order conservatives will side then.

Skyhook

12-18-2012, 13:09

Never let a tragedy go to waste

Sometimes, in my darkest hours, I think the progressives rejoice in our 'crisis' like this horrific killing by the deranged wild man.

certifiedfunds

12-18-2012, 13:11

Sometimes, in my darkest hours, I think the progressives rejoice in our 'crisis' like this horrific killing by the deranged wild man.

Oh, I'm absolutely certain of it.

Progressives are vile, evil people.

TxGun

12-18-2012, 14:37

If your plan is to continue to live with a government that imposes that law, you are right. But, if that's your plan, you are already the problem.

Of course it's not "my plan" :upeyes:. But if such a travesty is voted into law and is upheld by the SCOTUS, then our options as gun owners could become a lot more limited, at least for one election cycle. And it may be a lot longer than that judging by the way the gullible American electorate voted in the last election. So what would you do? Move to another country? Move your family out into the Alaskan wilderness and live off the land? Both options, I guess, but really not practical for most people. Organize a militia and dare the government to move on you? That's been tried a few times and I don't know of any instance in which it worked out well. We're not going to have a widespread civil uprising over an "assault weapons" ban. Just ain't gonna happen. You can beat your chest all you want, but the federal bureaucracy has often demonstrated it's power to punish individuals...to negatively impact their personal freedom and lifestyle. Don't pay your taxes this year, tell the IRS to 'go to hell, you ain't payin', and get back to me. But I'll tell you what...I'll contact our socialist president directly and tell him not to sign any gun ban laws that appear on his desk. You do the same. Deal?

whoflungdo

12-18-2012, 14:42

Of course it's not "my plan" :upeyes:. But if such a travesty is voted into law and is upheld by the SCOTUS, then none of us have much choice, at least for one election cycle, do we?. And it may be a lot longer than that judging by the way the gullible American electorate voted in the last election. I'll tell you what though...I'll contact our socialist president directly and tell him not to sign any gun ban laws that appear on his desk. You do the same. Deal?

It won't be a gun ban law, it will be a Child Protection and Safety law..

pugman

12-18-2012, 17:33

Sometimes, in my darkest hours, I think the politicans rejoice in our 'crisis' like this horrific killing by the deranged wild man.

I fixed it for you.

I read your posts and we generally agree - don't be the person who thinks both sides of the aisle don't sit around and think "how can we make money, gain more power, please those people I owe" anytime a crisis of any nature comes up".

Point in fact: The TSA was signed into existance 68 days after 9/11

This is the fact which should scare people more than anything; Congress and the Fed, when they want to, can move extremely fast when it comes to legislation.

KY Moose

12-18-2012, 17:40

This is the fact which should scare people more than anything; Congress and the Fed, when they want to, can move extremely fast when it comes to legislation.

Or even faster with an Executive Order, or Presidential Directive.

marchboom

12-18-2012, 18:46

Guns could easily be banned in America. All the prerequisites, logistically and culturally, are in place. Frankly I'm surprised we've made it this long.

Sure, they can be banned. That doesn't mean people won't have them.

We will be disarmed when we decide to give into our government's requests to disarm. Somehow these weasel liberal politicians think they can just make a law and we will all just fall in line and obey. They don't know the resolve of American gun owners.

I will give up my guns when the Secret Service gives up theirs.

Skyhook

12-19-2012, 08:19

I fixed it for you.

I read your posts and we generally agree - don't be the person who thinks both sides of the aisle don't sit around and think "how can we make money, gain more power, please those people I owe" anytime a crisis of any nature comes up".

Point in fact: The TSA was signed into existance 68 days after 9/11

This is the fact which should scare people more than anything; Congress and the Fed, when they want to, can move extremely fast when it comes to legislation.

You are correct, we do agree, mostly. But as to 'politicians or progressives', think of the entire history of this country before the 1960s-- Dave Kopel hints that 1968 was the tipping point-- prior to that, the howling, barking, liberal/progressive was kept in check and the second amendment was not under full-court-press attack.

As for how fast the feddle gummint can act when it comes to destruction of individual liberty, our country's main difference among all other nations, I have no reason to disagree at all.

Fear Night

12-19-2012, 08:50

O'Reilly talking about "AK-15s" and sticking up for Australia's gun laws. And he says he considers himself a "Second Amendment guy" :upeyes:

Bill O'Reilly asks: "What Can We Do About Gun Violence?" - YouTube

Skyhook

12-19-2012, 08:56

O'Reilly talking about "AK-15s" and sticking up for Australia's gun laws. And he says he considers himself a "Second Amendment guy" :upeyes:

Bill O'Reilly asks: "What Can We Do About Gun Violence?" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unCqCQgX39w)

I quit watching O'Reilly. I do believe he has lost his edge and his rudder.. his fake anger and shoddy reasoning leave me cold. It 'jest ain't the same', that's all. :shakehead:

Bren

12-19-2012, 09:23

Of course it's not "my plan" :upeyes:. But if such a travesty is voted into law and is upheld by the SCOTUS, then our options as gun owners could become a lot more limited, at least for one election cycle.

I was thinking more in terms of criminal activity, but GT is the land of "OMG, what could I ever do?"

marchboom

12-19-2012, 11:15

I quit watching O'Reilly. I do believe he has lost his edge and his rudder.. his fake anger and shoddy reasoning leave me cold. It 'jest ain't the same', that's all. :shakehead:

I agree.

Although I watch his show every night just to see the new topics, he has lost my respect. He claims that he tells us "just the facts" to let us decide. 2 nights ago he couldn't even identify weapons accurately. He said that the AR-15 brought to the school in Conn. was an assault rifle. It wasn't. He said the shooter used this gun. Again, he didn't. He left it in his car.

Last night he had a story about a CHP Inland Bureau Chief who was making a $500,000 a year salary, will retire on a 90% pension and then will be making $175,000 a year (pension). Run the numbers, Bill. $175,000 is not 90% of $500,000. And CHP Bureau Chiefs do no make $500,000 a year...far from it.

So, how much of what O'Reilly says can we believe?

DustyJacket

12-19-2012, 11:34

You could wave a wand and magically make every gun in the USA disappear forever, then withing a month have violence using guns.

We cannot stop 50-pound bales of marajuana from being smuggled into the country.
We cannot stop people from being smuggled into the country.
How could we stop guns and ammo from being smuggled into the country?

TxGun

12-19-2012, 11:52

I agree.

Although I watch his show every night just to see the new topics, he has lost my respect. He claims that he tells us "just the facts" to let us decide. 2 nights ago he couldn't even identify weapons accurately. He said that the AR-15 brought to the school in Conn. was an assault rifle. It wasn't. He said the shooter used this gun. Again, he didn't. He left it in his car.

Last night he had a story about a CHP Inland Bureau Chief who was making a $500,000 a year salary, will retire on a 90% pension and then will be making $175,000 a year (pension). Run the numbers, Bill. $175,000 is not 90% of $500,000. And CHP Bureau Chiefs do no make $500,000 a year...far from it.

So, how much of what O'Reilly says can we believe?

As news commentary shows go, O'Reilly is one of the best, IMO. He's certainly not perfect by any means. He makes his share of mistakes, but I don't see obvious and intentional lying from him. They all rely on staffers and staffers are people, so you'll occasionally have errors. Typically, he'll issue a correction. And he'll read mail that calls him out on his errors...which none of his contemporaries will do. However some, like the clowns on MSNBC and quite a few on the mainstream networks, sytematically lie night-in-and-night-out, or refuse to report in-depth on certain events, in order to promote their agendas, which 95% of the time have their genesis in WH talking points. And they are so obvious about it you can only deduce that they don't care. The prevarications will stick with a certain % of their viewership and that's all they're after.

marchboom

12-19-2012, 12:02

As news commentary shows go, O'Reilly is one of the best, IMO. He's certainly not perfect by any means. He makes his share of mistakes, but I don't see obvious and intentional lying from him. However some, like the clowns on MSNBC and quite a few on the mainstream networks, sytematically lie night-in-and-night-out, or refuse to report in-depth on certain events, in order to promote their agendas, which 95% of the time have their genesis in WH talking points.

No doubt, the Factor is probably the best out there but O'Reilly still has the obligation to get his facts right. If we are to make our decisions based on what is said on the Factor, he should get it right. And these facts are not difficult to get right. Hell, if I can detect these inaccuracies, he can.

Bren

12-19-2012, 14:40

As news commentary shows go, O'Reilly is one of the best, IMO.

O'reilly always comes off as fake, insincere and not too bright, when I've watched him. Maybe I picked bad times. From my perspective, he seems like a semi-liberal sissy from the city.

fuzzy03cls

12-19-2012, 14:58

I think at this point there are too many guns out there to actually take them. I can see it getting very bad when the gov tries it with those that have tons of guns, ammo, & mags.

sbhaven

12-19-2012, 15:16

I've been telling people that if they want to see what a gun ban would look like, they would have to look no farther than the ban on drugs. More than a few Progressives think that by simply passing a law that says guns are banned, that a magic wand would be waved and guns would gone.

While that may be what happens in their Utopian unicorns and fairies fantasy land, in reality even if the commercial manufacture of a guns were somehow banned, there would still be guns in the hands of the police and military. So thieves would concentrate on stealing from them rather from the peasants. Not to mention that anyone with a half way decent machine shop could probably turn out functioning firearms over night.

zeke501

12-20-2012, 08:07

It's easy to say "they'll never take my guns!" (and I do feel that way myself) but if the penalty for possession is a mandatory 10 - 15 years in prison many will rethink that position.

Where would they put all the people? They don't have enough room already!!

I guess they could put us in FEMA camps:upeyes:

Just think of all the businesses that would go under, sporting goods shops, gun shops, manufacturing gun accessories, clothing, endless, makes no sense...but then again they are dems, they do not think!!!:upeyes:

kirgi08

12-20-2012, 09:33

Never become a refugee.'08.

akroguy

12-20-2012, 10:00

Wolverines!

Gun confiscation=the next Civil War.

KY Moose

12-20-2012, 13:50

Where would they put all the people? They don't have enough room already!!

I guess they could put us in FEMA camps

If a new law and sentencing guidelines made the offense a felony punishable by a fine and so many years of supervised release, then prison space wouldn't be an issue.

marchboom

12-20-2012, 14:36

The enemy of all people believing in the Constitution is the democrats. They are the ones who will try to take away our Second Amendment rights. They need our "attention". :whistling:

tslex

12-20-2012, 21:25

The enemy of all people believing in the Constitution is the democrats. They are the ones who will try to take away our Second Amendment rights. They need our "attention". :whistling:

If you think this is an issue of partisan politics, if you think the Republicans are you friend because they are Republicans, you really have not been paying attention.

Glockdude1

12-20-2012, 21:31

There are 300,000,000 guns in America. You can ban them all you want. They're not going away. Ever.

:agree:

marchboom

12-21-2012, 11:42

If you think this is an issue of partisan politics, if you think the Republicans are you friend because they are Republicans, you really have not been paying attention.

I'm not saying they are my friends but it is always the democrats who bring up gun control laws. They make laws to tax us more. They vote in obamacare against the will of the American public. The vast majority of what is wrong in this country is due to democrats.

And then there's the phony Hollywood left? But that's for another post.

Skyhook

12-21-2012, 17:45

This needs more repetition and emphasis. Look at the books! Examine the records.

"I'm not saying they are my friends but it is always the democrats who bring up gun control laws."

jakebrake

12-21-2012, 17:51

No, but this entire episode shows how easy it will be for the right politician with the right subject to talk the people out of all their freedoms.

agreed. and it also shows how information (the internet specifically) can be a mixed blessing.

oldman11

12-21-2012, 19:40

Watch this video and then try to talk about this so called AWB. Obama needs to watch this and then tell us how this AWB is going to help us.

http://www.youtube.com/user/hickok45

YOU are trying to make it illegal to protect ourselves. YOU are actually making it open season on law abiding citizens. I dare any politician to talk to this woman and then tell me how an AWB and 10 round only magazines are going to protect us.

writwing

12-21-2012, 20:15

Watch this video and then try to talk about this so called AWB. Obama needs to watch this and then tell us how this AWB is going to help us.

http://www.youtube.com/user/hickok45

YOU are trying to make it illegal to protect ourselves. YOU are actually making it open season on law abiding citizens. I dare any politician to talk to this woman and then tell me how an AWB and 10 round only magazines are going to protect us.

We wont need to protect ourselves, the government will protect us (sarcasm). They don't wish to debate, they just want to confiscate. Its not about the children, safety or any other such thing. It is about the government taking over completely. Once Barry-Care kicks in there are going to a lot of angry people, they must take to guns away to prevent any chance of an uprising.

Skyhook

12-22-2012, 03:35

We wont need to protect ourselves, the government will protect us (sarcasm). They don't wish to debate, they just want to confiscate. Its not about the children, safety or any other such thing. It is about the government taking over completely. Once Barry-Care kicks in there are going to a lot of angry people, they must take to guns away to prevent any chance of an uprising.

Exactly.

And, I'll hazard a guess that the populace will have even more to be enraged about as the socialist/progressive plan unfolds.

dukeblue91

12-22-2012, 06:55

The 300 million guns don't need to go away over night.
If it is made illegal to own or use a gun this will eventually work itself out.
Even if you still own a gun after such a law, what would you do with it?
You can't ever use it for target shooting or even to protect yourself with one as this would be an automatic conviction if you do.
Also this kind of stuff will not happen over night and will start slow under the guise of reasonable gun laws as we have now and will be more to come every few month/ years till they are mostly gone.
You will be left with some .22LR, shotguns and maybe some 30-06 rifles for hunting and recreational shooting.
It will be extremely hard to get a license for any of those and ammunition will also be restricted to a certain amount at any one time and you will need to have a license to purchase ammo too so that the .gov can keep an eye on you too.

Only the elite and very wealthy will be able to get such licenses and be able to afford a gun at all.

There will be government funded shooting clubs where you are allowed to target shoot with rented guns by the hour to offset the argument of the people of sport and recreation shooting.
And it will be sold as you don't need to own a gun as you can go and shoot any gun you want and cheaply too, so there is no need to ever own one.

I hope that I'll be dead by the time this will be all done.

Oh and if you think this can never happen here take a look around you and all the other countries in the world and you see that it can and will.

marchboom

12-22-2012, 11:03

The following people should set an example by giving up their guns, telling their bodyguards not to be armed and refuse any type of security other than what the ordinary citizen has (which is NOTHING):

1) The Hollywood elite.
2) Every politician who advocates any type of gun control.
3) Every liberal judge and any judge who has ever ruled in favor of gun control. This includes the Supreme Court.
4) Every police chief or sheriff who has advocated gun control.
5) All United Nations ambassadors (from any country) who want more gun laws for the U.S.
6) And most of all, the Secret Service...especially the Secret Service!

I'm sure there are many more but I think you get the picture.

oldman11

12-22-2012, 11:12

The following people should set an example by giving up their guns, telling their bodyguards not to be armed and refuse any type of security other than what the ordinary citizen has (which is NOTHING):

1) The Hollywood elite.
2) Every politician who advocates any type of gun control.
3) Every liberal judge and any judge who has ever ruled in favor of gun control. This includes the Supreme Court.
4) Every police chief or sheriff who has advocated gun control.
5) All United Nations ambassadors (from any country) who want more gun laws for the U.S.
6) And most of all, the Secret Service...especially the Secret Service!

I'm sure there are many more but I think you get the picture.
Oh no. They will tell you that they are important people, the leaders, and they need protection. They don't give a crap about the rest of you sheep.

marchboom

12-22-2012, 12:17

Oh no. They will tell you that they are important people, the leaders, and they need protection. They don't give a crap about the rest of you sheep.

Yep, that's exactly how they think.

Therefore, we the people must take care of ourselves. We the people will decide if we will become disarmed by our corrupt government.

whoflungdo

12-22-2012, 12:33

Oh no. They will tell you that they are important people, the leaders, and they need protection. They don't give a crap about the rest of you sheep.